Friday, April 23, 2010

Jani Schofield - the evidence is there....



I don’t need to go a-hunting to find more evidence that indicates that Jani Schofield has unrecognized synesthesia. The evidence jumps out at me unbidden as I go about my business. Jani is a young Californian girl who has been given the diagnosis of childhood-onset schizophrenia and has been at the centre of a media circus since last year. Jani is the subject of a book that her father has been commissioned to write. I am of the opinion that Jani’s so-called psychotic behaviour could possibly by fully explained as the result of a combination of synesthesia, autism, OCD, intellectual giftedness (a terribly burdensome mental abnormality), inept parenting and a well-developed imagination.
There is some anecdotal evidence that synesthesia, autism, OCD, Tourette’s and intellectual giftedness are a group of traits that are often found in each other’s company, so it isn’t far-fetched at all to propose that one child could have four of these conditions. The famous British Asperger savant Daniel Tammet has three, possibly four of these traits. And it isn’t true that all autistic kids lack imagination – some have heaps of it, and some create their own fantasy worlds. In his autobiography Born on a Blue Day, Daniel Tammet described in great detail an imaginary friend that he created as a way of coping with loneliness when he was a boy.

I’ve been looking through press stories and videos on the internet while working on compiling a reference list of the information that is available about Jani Schofield on the internet. The very size of this list is, I believe, evidence of a type of child abuse. Jani has been exposed to an incredible amount of media exposure on top-rating television shows, at least two newspapers and a web site created by her parents revealing every detail of her life. All this invasion of her privacy happening at the tender age of 7 years, way too young to give informed consent to being made into a mass media star, and much too young and vulnerable to have the power to refuse.

So what is this evidence of synesthesia that I’m raving about? Well, first some explanation. Bear with me please. There are ways in which one can definitely tell the difference between synesthesia and psychotic hallucinations or psychotic delusions. In fact synesthesia experts have compiled lists of the defining characteristics of synesthesia. One could consider these lists to be diagnostic criteria for synesthesia. One characteristic of synesthesia is that it shows remarkably exact consistency over long periods of time. A very specific trigger will reliably result in the exact same corresponding sensory or cognitive experience over and over again. This is because synesthesia is a reflection of connections in the brain. These fixed relationships between triggers and experiences can span years, even lifetimes.

Another thing that is a point of difference between the synesthete and the schizophrenic is that the synesthete knows the difference between their own triggered syne-sensory or syne-cognitive experiences and non-synesthesia experiences that are triggered by sensing of or knowledge of the world outside of one’s noggin. Us synesthetes know that synesthesia experiences are not “real” in that they are not a reflection of the non-mental world that all humans and creatures experience, even though synesthesia experiences can “feel” very much like knowledge or sensing, and they are real in that they are a reflection of real structures in the brain. I guess synesthetes learn through being a part of a culture that our experiences are idiosyncratic and have no logical basis. But for some reason that I don’t understand, schizophrenics apparently believe their hallucinations are real. I guess it is a disease of gullibility. They believe all types of things that no sensible person would believe. As a non-schizophrenic I really don’t know how schizophrenia works, but I’m pretty sure a genuine, actively psychotic schizophrenic would not spontaneously make a distinction between a thing perceived that is real and a similar thing perceived that is not real. That surely is not the sort of thing that a psychotic person would be expected to do. But I’ve just watched a video in which Jani Schofield appears to make exactly this type of distinction, unprompted. At the beginning of the video below, a lady asks Jani (playing on a swing outdoors) if she is seeing a lot of numbers “right now”. Jani replies that she sees “two tens, the real ten and, and the regular ten.” Then the interviewer lady (journalist?) asks someone else (rhetorically?) whether Jani is seeing stuff that’s really there and it is just that they aren’t seeing it. The setting is a wide-open landscape, and from the video one can’t be sure that there isn’t a real number ten that Jani could see on a sign or written somewhere, or even discernable in a ten-like pattern in the grass or graffiti somewhere. What could it possibly mean when Jani makes a distinction between a real and a non-real number ten? As a synesthete who experiences ordinal-linguistic personification (OLP) of numbers and letters, there is an obvious explanation. Does Jani see a real number ten written somewhere in the landscape, which instantly triggers a synesthetic vision of the number ten, in all of its reified glory? And why is Jani’s non-real ten a “regular” ten? Is this because the word “regular” is a reference to the incredibly fixed, reliable nature of her number-related synesthesia experiences? I am more convinced than ever that Jani is a synesthete, and is also not psychotic. Does it take one to know one?

Kelsen, Don and French, Tim (2009) Young schizophrenic at her mind’s mercy. (video) Los Angeles Times. YouTube. June 29th 2009.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UTUMt05_nCI



And here are some more interesting videos of Jani Schofield. In the one below from the Oprah show Jani is seen avoiding eye contact as though Oprah has flesh-dissolving laser lights streaming out of her eyes. Autism I wonder? This video also shows the hand tic of Jani’s that is seen in most of the many videos of Jani that one can find on the internet. Are tics a symptom of schizophrenia? I don’t think so, but I believe tics and repetitive movements are quite common in autistic people.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR1o8K4MeMs&NR=1


In this video Jani makes it abundantly clear that she does not want to talk with one of the most popular people in the world of entertainment in the United States. What kind of unsociable person would snub Oprah? I think I know what kind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEyWvfdcH2g&NR=1



16 comments:

Adelaide Dupont said...

Well, we do talk about real and imaginary numbers.

And rational and irrational ones.

There are Platonic ideas/solids of various numbers.

So the first number 10 could well get burnt into the brain, and any other number 10 is not so perfect.

Jc said...

Wow, schizophrenia.. A disease of gullibility? What a horribly offensive statement. I'm totally on board with you that her symptoms are not matching schizophrenia... But I do not appreciate your lack of sensitivity on the subject. I've been battling schizophrenia most of my life, and apparently you don't understand how severe schizophrenia is. It's not a disease of gullibility, it's a mental illness, for heaven's sake!

When we have hallucinations, they are so real to us that we listen to what they say. I highly doubt you wouldn't do the same. But it's obvious that since you don't understand schizophrenia, that your words are meaningless. Go educate yourself, and stop being so insensitive to mental illness. Think of the most scary nightmare you've ever had, think of having to deal with that every waking minute of your life... When you have a nightmare, do you question the reality of everything? No, you go along with it. It's like a non-lucid nightmare.

Lili Marlene said...

I think you've read value judgements into my writing that simply isn't there. The basic fact is that people who have schizophrenia are supposed to suffer from delusions, which I presume means believing things that a healthy, unimpaired person wouldn't believe. As I explained, I don't know why they do this as I don't have the first-hand experience. I don't think it is an unreasonable theory to put forward that the heart of the problem could be in some type of deficiency in critical thinking, because apparently there are plenty of people who experience the phenomenon of "voices" frequently who don't succumb to mental illness. But of course, it could be true that these people have a less extreme condition to start with. I certainly don't pretend to be an expert, and I'm interested in the perspective of one who does have first-hand experience.

I'll continue to be "insensitive to mental illness" because I think genuine mental illness is a very bad thing that should be cured. This is not the same thing as lacking respect for the folks who have to contend with such issues. Isn't illness by definition a bad thing? So why do I have to respect it?

Lili Marlene said...

The concepts of belief and credulousness can't be avoided when one is trying to define and explore the difference between synaesthesia experiences and hallicinations that are characteristic of mental illness. As you've written, Jc, a schizophrenic might take auditory hallucinations seriously, while I, a synaesthete, do not take the idea that the concept of Wednesday has a set colour, even though whenever I think of the concept of Wednesday I will "see" in my mind's eye a particular colour and the same colour each time, throughout my life. Why am I, and I think all or most synaesthetes, able to maintain a sensible perspective on our atypical sensory experiences, while apparently people who have a psychotic mental illness do not have a critical meta-cognitive distance from their atypical sensory experiences? One might wonder if the "voices" seem more real because they are like people, but there is a type of synaesthesia in which concepts and objects are linked with personal characteristics that you'd find in people, not objects, but again, synaesthetes like myself who personify numbers and letters and cutlery understand that our feelings are just our own idiosyncratic experiences that are not a reflection of some objective reality. How can this apparent important difference between hallucination and synaesthesia be explained?

Jc said...

Okay, so put yourself in our shoes... If you heard or saw something that is extremely real to you, so real that anyone in your mind would think the same... you cannot tell me you wouldn't respond in some way, shape or form. It's impossible. And you are very much wrong in your thoughts on delusions. Do you have any idea how many times a day, any normal person has a delusion? A delusion can be as simple as a perceived flaw on the body, an assumption about a 'back biting' friend. So you cannot tell me that any 'unimpaired' person doesn't experience delusions.

I do know that in the case of Schizophrenia, delusions can be very very different (in that someone is following you, you feel like you have a special ability, etc) And yeah, they seem pretty ridiculous to the 'virgin' eye. But they aren't to 'out there' when you know where the person's hallucinations or feelings come from. I had childhood Schizophrenia (diagnosed at 11) then as I got older, the illness stayed with me and was changed to Paranoid Schizophrenia. I have had delusions, both currently and in the past, that I was being followed and that once that 'someone' found me, I was going to be killed. Well, that may seem unreasonable, insensible, and down right crazy to most people... But imagine having hallucinations so real... that it makes those delusions come to play. So, once again, imagine you hallucinate 85-95% of the day, and these hallucinations followed you everywhere. You have no idea you're ill, so everything is extremely real to you, and MUST be real. You cannot tell me that you wouldn't feel like something was following you, something was having these people, creatures, monsters... evil things follow you.

I cannot remember if I read right, but don't you have Synesthesia? Would you feel alright if someone asked you why someone would put colors to letters and numbers? Why would any 'normal' person do that? I'm not saying I believe this way, but that is exactly how I feel about your comment. You’re making my illness sound ridiculous... when I could easily say the same. But since I don’t believe that way, I understand the effects that it could have on someone with Synesthesia

And I wish that all mental illnesses could be cured... don't we all? But Schizophrenia, along with many others (Like Bipolar) cannot be cured, but controlled. I have only heard 1 story in which someone 'cured' their Schizophrenia... That's a bunch of bull. They ended up experiencing symptoms within 2 months after they had been 'cured'. Take all the medications, e.c.t. treatments, etc etc... No one can be cured. It's like cancer... some cancers are incurable... so are you going to disrespect someone because they're not 'trying hard enough' to not have cancer? That would be ludicrous!

Synesthesia is nothing like having a hallucination. It's basic. I'm talking about a mental illness, which is severe (and nothing like what you are explaining.) I've had something similar to Synesthesia (not the same in many ways, but similar) to where at the age of 6 and on, I would see strange aura like colors around people. I might see a purple around Bob and a red around Jill. And I would associate moods and people around the auras. I knew that it wasn't real. That's really simple to figure out, even as a child. But I'm meaning an 11 year old seeing a realistic human being, talking to you, becoming your friend, seeing them everyday... then one day vanishing into thin air.

Jc said...

I didn't think much of it at the time, until I started seeing dead bodies, people getting murdered, ... then all of it vanishing into thin air. I didn't know anything was wrong, I thought everyone had the same problems. Which I hear is true for people with Synesthesia. You don't realize something is wrong, until it's pointed out, and by the time it's pointed out, you're already 28 years old and constantly having realistic human beings hold guns to your head, telling you they'll be back tomorrow... wondering... "Was that real, or was it not?"... In a nutshell, what Schizophrenia is, is not being able to tell reality from non-reality. When I was seeing guns being pulled, and the threat of them coming back, you wouldn't freak out if you had no idea that was real??? Would if it had been, and now you're shot and killed. I didn't realize something was wrong until someone saw one of my episodes, and I saw a doctor. But once everything becomes realistic again, and my brain goes psychotic, I regress and everything becomes brand new again, and I'm back in the same state of fear.

It's not really fair living in a world full of judgmental people, such as yourself, who don't even 'attempt' to understand what it's like... and why others act the way they do. Maybe you need to do that more, instead of judging from a distance... with 'blind eyes', as I like to say. Then maybe you would comprehend why Schizophrenics sometimes believe what they see and hear. (which you are making it seem like Schizophrenics believe EVERY damn thing they see and hear. Which is far from the truth.)

And, never ever ever compare what you have with Schizophrenia. They are in no way the same. I do agree with you that Jani doesn't act like a Schizophrenic. The numbers and personifications seem to much like Synaesthesia (and a mix of other things). And it seems like she doesn't genuinely believe they are there. Mainly by her actions such as videos of her saying "I like your bathing suit 24 hours" It seems to 'make believe' to be schizophrenia. Every Schizophrenic I've meet, including myself, Young and old, have realistic conversations, never like Jani's. But that's just my opinion.

Lili Marlene said...

I can only conclude that many of your points in your first comment is nothing more than trouble-making, as the arguments that you have made such an effort to argue against there are positions that I've never made. If you feel like setting fire to a straw man, do it in your own backyard.

"Would you feel alright if someone asked you why someone would put colors to letters and numbers?" I'd feel somewhat jaded at having to educate a person who can perfectly well find out the basics of synaesthesia from any basic outline of the condition. Synaesthetes don't "put colours to letters and numbers" in any deliberate or conscious sense of the word "put".

"I've had something similar to Synesthesia (not the same in many ways, but similar) to where at the age of 6 and on, I would see strange aura like colors around people. I might see a purple around Bob and a red around Jill. And I would associate moods and people around the auras."

This is a quite straighforward description of a fully scientifically recognized form of synaesthesia. V. S. Ramachandran wrote about a similar case in a man who was also diagnosed with AS in his most recent book and also in a recently published journal paper. I'm happy to give details if you are interested. Plenty of people who do not have schizophrenia or any mental illness have similar experiences.

Lili Marlene said...

"In a nutshell, what Schizophrenia is, is not being able to tell reality from non-reality."

So judgemental!! Wasn't that the main point that I made, which you so vehemently objected to?

"And it seems like she doesn't genuinely believe they are there. Mainly by her actions such as videos of her saying "I like your bathing suit 24 hours" It seems to 'make believe' to be schizophrenia. Every Schizophrenic I've meet, including myself, Young and old, have realistic conversations, never like Jani's. But that's just my opinion."

I've never witnessed schizophrenia first-hand or experienced the illness, so your perspective on this matter is a fresh perspective that I value, but always keeping in mind that no one can be sure that any anonymous commenter on the internet is who they claim to be. In your opinion, are the hallucinations of schizophrenia ever fun or playful or playmates?

Angie said...

Lili, you are a child, give it up. You have autism therefore you believe anyone who is remotely like you has to be 100%, due to your black and white thinking. You are very judge mental toward schizophrenic individuals as well as the diagnosis itsel out of fear of being misdiagnosed.. You are clearly insecure and have little knowledge of schizophrenia and show this through your belittling and obsession with correcting others grammar while trying to belittle. You constantly make false assertions that schizophrenia has one, and only one known cause and this is the reason children can't have it. I akin you more to an emotional baby throwing a tantrum and I think that you would benefit from some counseling o get over your fear of being diagnosed as a schizophrenic. Stop putting out false information about schizophrenia, as the disease has had multiple, studied causes that are readily available to read about. Get yourself evaluated please, your mental health seems to be dwindling.

Angie said...

Once again hove enabled comment moderation. If you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen hun.

Lili Marlene said...

How often do you think I check my email and how often do you think i have time to fiddle about with comments and my blog? I don't just sit here all day waiting for whatever. If you want instant responses from ppl go to play with Facebook.

Lili Marlene said...

"...your belittling and obsession with correcting others grammar ..."

Where have I corrected anyone's grammar in these comments? I think you must he hallucinating, Angie.

"You constantly make false assertions that schizophrenia has one, and only one known cause..."

Where? Again, I think it's all in your mind. I could go on and make rude remarks about your state of mental health, but that would be so lame.

baszia said...

Hi, I have to come to this a few years late! I just watched a video on Jani and Bodhi Schofield which showed Jani, now a tween who I first encountered when she was a lot younger, and Bodhi, who is experiencing difficulties which see him at age six years I think spending extended periods in hospital.

I am interested in your ideas about Jani and synesthesia. And in your general scepticism about the diagnoses handed out by medical professionals with regard to mental illness.

Many children show extreme behaviours and with good support and trained people around them, come through just fine.

Due to the depression in London in the early 90s, my own financial state and a lack of jobs in my own sphere, I found myself, a trained secondary art teacher, working in a secondary Special Needs school in London as a one-on-one teacher for a thirteen year old boy who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia. I had no special skills/ training beyond that of a class teacher and felt it was inappropriate; but having accepted the job (without knowing I would be working with this child), I duly began working with him. Nobody in the school had any idea about his illness and what particular approaches to take; the head teacher seemed to hold a peculiar malevolence towards him. I said I would like to work using music and art with him. She laughed at me. I slowly developed a good relationship with him although it was never easy. I personally never experienced any violence from him although he was volatile and could be aggressive and physical. He was banned from a school outing one day because he had accidentally slashed a boy on the face with the end of a compass he had in his bag. The head teacher threatened him with the police, knowing how paranoid he was; she said I could now have the whole day with him making art and listening to music, ha ha!

We did -and I had never seen him so ecstatic. I reluctantly let him put on loud pop although I had been envisaging some calming Mozart! He worked, he smiled, he joked, he praised God, he wanted to miss his lunch hour to go on painting.

After 20-plus years of working with so-called special needs children, one learns to work with the individual and not with their label.
Children are so often, at least in part, the reflection of their home environment, their parents and their cultural expectations. The gifted child who 'reads' Kant age six, the behaviour disordered child who is sleeping with his mother age eight, the one who cannot read or write who learns to read and write fluently after having been at an expensive private school where something or other did not suit him / her. The girl who had terrific fun telling the most elaborate, fantastic lies to the ed psych who then raced white-faced to the head and declared the child was in mortal danger and must be immediately put on some register or other.

I was later to experience closer to home a young adult with a diagnosis of schizophrenia who would eventually take her own life.

One learns after years of psych wards, consultants, trial and error medication regimes, how very very primitive the MH science is and how terrifying this fact is for those afflicted and those close to them who watch as the loved one deteriorates, momentarily improves (oh joy) and then, hating their life so much, commits suicide; or becomes a vegetable; or develops strange jaw movements; and becomes grossly overweight; and sleeps all day and all night too.

Since that first encounter with my student, I have seen many people with the (very elastic) diagnosis of schizophrenia and wonder whether Jani and Bodhi may not in fact be suffering, at least in part, from living in the panopticon.

And as you say, it really does look as though Jani is synesthetic (perhaps alongside other traits).

I don't deny the parents must have suffered great distress, not to say financial hardship. But I do wish they had had much more advice in dealing in a low key way with it rather than clinging to a diagnosis of schizophrenia and allowing their children to become public property.

Lili Marlene said...

Thank you for your interesting comment baszia. There's one point I must take issue with, your suggestion that gifted kids can be the product of their environment. This sounds too much like the "pushy parent" stereotype, and it is simply wrong, I know from experience having raised kids who repeatedly gained access to G&T programs in the govt school system through testing. No one in our family coached or pressured the kids to get into special programs or to achieve or read early, in fact we would have had a devil of a job stopping them! I put it down to genetics, sensible early nutrition (breastfeeding beyond guidelines), a stable home early in life, geniune parental interest, lots of interesting outings including playgroup and kindy, being read to and having constant access to lots of books and libraries.

I believe it is possible that all of the children you referred to in your comment could have behaviour that is partly or largely determined by genetic factors, and these days I look upon all people as "sufferers" of their own unique genetic syndrome. Researchers continue to fail to identify specific genes "for" intelligence, but i think that could be because there are too many genes and combinations of genes and epigenetic effects and too many different types of intelligence. Even in our family I can see definite similarities and differences in the "gifteness" of our kids, and a lot of it has to do with personality and motivation (see recent research on influence of the "big 5" dimensions of personality on academic achievement), which many ppl do not realise are genetically determined.

I see parenting as a job of discovering the child and trying to understand the child more than shaping the child or controlling the child.

baszia said...

I agree with your points. I think the G &T programs, the ones I saw in the UK at least, pretty quickly weeded out children who were products of pushy parents, although sometimes they would gain entry initially. I also, though, saw children who were from families where the children's gifts were not recognised and who also did not get picked up by school because their gifts did not 'fit' into a G &T program which tended to focus on intellectual pursuits.

I feel that the whole area of child development is so complex and so ideologically-held that it is a hard one to explore from a neutral position. I know in my own case that my views have shifted enormously over the years. I suppose were I to boil it down to the essential, I would say in the most simplistic terms it is a nature-nurture combination. Where the burden falls, I don't dare hazard a guess.Your basic principles sound very sound to my ears - a good start!

It is a very interesting area and you have inspired me to look further into synesthesia and artists. Kandinsky, maybe Paul Klee. So thanks.

baszia said...

And, yes, that is interesting about the interplay of personality and motivation on academic and / or other achievements. A subject we don't hear so much about.